Hearing will be held today on the petition challenging the approval to prosecute Punjab Police's suspended DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar, who is involved in a bribery case. CBI has opposed this petition in the special court. The agency, while filing its reply in the court, said that the sanction to prosecute the accused is completely valid and its application is not justified on the basis of facts and law. The CBI, in its reply, said that under Section 19(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amended 2018), the competent authority had sanctioned the prosecution of the accused after reviewing all the facts and documents related to the investigation. According to CBI, a case was registered against DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar and co-accused Krishnau Sharda on October 16, 2025, based on the written complaint of the complainant. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed in the court on 3 December 2025. CBI told the court that the court had taken cognizance of the case on March 13 and at that time a valid prosecution sanction order was on record. In such a situation, it is not appropriate to question the validity of the sanction order. Information given to the Chief Secretary: CBI refuted Bhullar's claim that only the Punjab government could have given sanction to prosecute him. The agency said that Bhullar is an IPS officer and the President has the power to remove him from service. The Union Home Ministry had given approval to run a case against him. The agency also clarified that the Punjab government was not kept out of the process. While sending the sanction proposal on 3 December 2025, the Chief Secretary of Punjab was also informed about this. Citing the decisions of the Supreme Court, CBI cited several decisions of the Supreme Court and said that questions related to the sanction to prosecute the accused can be raised during the trial. It is premature to file such a petition at this time. The agency also argued that demanding or taking bribe cannot be part of the official duty of any government official. Therefore, the claim of additional legal protection by the accused also does not apply in this case. Attempt to delay trial: CBI CBI told the court that the purpose of the accused's plea is to keep the process of framing charges pending and delay the trial. Therefore the petition should be dismissed.